Ha! So Lets suppose Apple creates a new innovative product iX. What would Samsung do, it will copy all the utilities & features of iX and produce it in all possible sizes it can.Then they say they are very proud of hard work it takes to copy & implement in their own products.

Well, I just wish that Apple try to stop its profit erosion by innovating at yet another higher level rather than to take the fight to the legal trenches. Imagine the benefits it would have brought to consumers. No prize for guessing who will be the biggest winner in current state of affair.

@Frank- it's true that an analyst report indicates that Apple took home 71 percent of all handset profits last quarter while Samsung took 37 percent (the total adds up to more than 100% because a bunch of companies, including RIM and Nokia, lost money).
http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4236110/Analyst--Apple-took-80--of-handset-profits-in-Q4
On one hand, you could say "Apple is still bringing home the bulk of the profit so what's the big deal?" But the trend line is clear. In Q42011, Apple took 80 percent of handset profits. This comment is not meant to defend Apple's overall behavior in this situation, but I think the numbers do support the claim that Samsung's success is cutting into Apple's sizeable profit. Any company would act to try to stop this.

It is my understanding that Apple initiated this lawsuit... Samsung is counter-suing. There have been reports on this website that Samsung is now the global leader in smartphone sales... interesting that Apple is suing now that they have lost their lead.

Samsung gained market share at Apple's expense, but another article on eetimes.com says that Apple earned 71% of all handset profits last year, compared to only 37% of all handset profits for Samsung.
Who is beating whom?

Today's announcement by Apple that it will no longer support "YouTube app" is a case in point. If Apple is resting on its laurels (unlike Samsung) it will soon feel the heat from users. They should look at what happened to Blackberry.
While comparison between Samsung and Apple seems fair, let us not forget that Apple only serves a niche market while Samsung recently replaced Nokia as World No.1. Apple cannot dream about such status in the near future.
As of 2011 Samsung sold 329 million units compared with 93.2 million of Apple. Also Samsung revenue for 2011 was about double that of Apple. The per unit income for Apple is high, but it serves just a small group of users.

I believe the ethnicity of the judge is irrelevant.
But on another matter: here is another piece of Apple's case that I find neither surprising nor egregious. So an executive at Samsung gave a very frank assessment of how its handsets didn't measure up to the iPhone? I would assume similar emails are sent at every company trying to keep pace with the iPhone. For that matter, I would expect that similar emails are sent in any company that is chasing another one and clearly getting it's tail whipped. Is analyzing a market leading product and trying to top it the same as copying?

In conjunction with unveiling of EE Times’ Silicon 60 list, journalist & Silicon 60 researcher Peter Clarke hosts a conversation on startups in the electronics industry. One of Silicon Valley's great contributions to the world has been the demonstration of how the application of entrepreneurship and venture capital to electronics and semiconductor hardware can create wealth with developments in semiconductors, displays, design automation, MEMS and across the breadth of hardware developments. But in recent years concerns have been raised that traditional venture capital has turned its back on hardware-related startups in favor of software and Internet applications and services. Panelists from incubators join Peter Clarke in debate.